COPP vs. HG=F

Last updated Jun 5, 2026

COPP (Sprott Copper Miners ETF) is Commodity Producers Equities fund tracking the Nasdaq Sprott Copper Miners Index, while HG=F (Copper) is an asset. Over the past year, COPP returned 106.38% vs 33.62% for HG=F. A 0.69 correlation means they provide meaningful diversification when combined.

Performance

COPP vs. HG=F - Performance Comparison

The chart below illustrates the hypothetical performance of a $10,000 investment in Sprott Copper Miners ETF (COPP) and Copper (HG=F). The values are adjusted to include any dividend payments, if applicable.

Returns By Period

In the year-to-date period, COPP achieves a 26.17% return, which is significantly higher than HG=F's 15.98% return.

COPP

• 1D: -0.41%
• 1M: 20.00%
• YTD: 26.17%
• 6M: 39.41%
• 1Y: 106.38%
• 3Y*: —
• 5Y*: —
• 10Y*: —

HG=F

• 1D: 0.75%
• 1M: 9.87%
• YTD: 15.98%
• 6M: 21.51%
• 1Y: 33.62%
• 3Y*: 20.05%
• 5Y*: 7.58%
• 10Y*: 11.90%

*Multi-year figures are annualized to reflect compound growth (CAGR)

COPP vs. HG=F - Yearly Performance Comparison

	2026 (YTD)	2025	2024
COPP Sprott Copper Miners ETF	26.17%	74.02%	4.18%
HG=F Copper	15.98%	39.82%	3.91%

Correlation

The correlation between COPP and HG=F is 0.70, which is moderate. They share some common price drivers but move independently often enough to provide real diversification benefit when combined.

	Correlation
Correlation (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	0.70
Correlation (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history since Mar 7, 2024	0.69

The correlation between COPP and HG=F has been stable across timeframes, ranging from 0.69 to 0.70 - a consistent structural relationship.

Return for Risk

COPP vs. HG=F — Risk / Return Rank

Compare risk-adjusted metric ranks to identify better-performing investments over the past 12 months.

COPP

COPP Risk / Return Rank: 70
COPP Sharpe Ratio Rank: 79
COPP Sortino Ratio Rank: 63
COPP Omega Ratio Rank: 62
COPP Calmar Ratio Rank: 75
COPP Martin Ratio Rank: 70

HG=F

HG=F Risk / Return Rank: 23
HG=F Sharpe Ratio Rank: 21
HG=F Sortino Ratio Rank: 19
HG=F Omega Ratio Rank: 35
HG=F Calmar Ratio Rank: 17
HG=F Martin Ratio Rank: 22

The rank (0–100) shows how this investment's returns compare to the risk taken. Higher = better. Based on the past 12 months of data, combining Sharpe, Sortino, and other metrics used by quantitative funds and institutional investors.

COPP vs. HG=F - Risk-Adjusted Trends Comparison

This table presents a comparison of risk-adjusted performance metrics for Sprott Copper Miners ETF (COPP) and Copper (HG=F). Risk-adjusted metrics are performance indicators that assess an investment's returns in relation to its risk, enabling a more accurate comparison of different investment options.

	COPP	HG=F	Difference
Sharpe ratio: Return per unit of total volatility	2.50	0.83	+1.67
Sortino ratio: Return per unit of downside risk	2.89	1.21	+1.68
Omega ratio: Gain probability vs. loss probability	1.37	1.21	+0.16
Calmar ratio: Return relative to maximum drawdown	3.70	1.17	+2.53
Martin ratio: Return relative to average drawdown	12.77	2.57	+10.21
Data is calculated on a 1-year rolling basis and updated daily. The trend shows the change in the indicator over the past month.

COPP vs. HG=F - Sharpe Ratio Comparison

The current COPP Sharpe Ratio is 2.50, which is higher than the HG=F Sharpe Ratio of 0.83. The chart below compares the historical Sharpe Ratios of COPP and HG=F, calculated using daily returns over the previous 12 months. A higher Sharpe Ratio indicates better risk-adjusted performance relative to the risk-free rate.

Sharpe Ratios by Period

	COPP	HG=F	Difference
Sharpe Ratio (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	2.50	0.83	+1.67
Sharpe Ratio (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period	—	0.27	—
Sharpe Ratio (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period	—	0.48	—
Sharpe Ratio (All Time) Calculated using the full available price history	1.10	0.21	+0.89

Drawdowns

COPP vs. HG=F - Drawdown Comparison

The maximum COPP drawdown since its inception was -44.37%, smaller than the maximum HG=F drawdown of -68.86%. Use the drawdown chart below to compare losses from any high point for COPP and HG=F.

Drawdown Indicators

	COPP	HG=F	Difference
Max Drawdown Largest peak-to-trough decline	-44.37%	-68.86%	+24.49%
Max Drawdown (1Y) Largest decline over 1 year	-28.91%	-25.17%	-3.74%
Max Drawdown (3Y) Largest decline over 3 years	—	-25.17%	—
Max Drawdown (5Y) Largest decline over 5 years	—	-34.96%	—
Max Drawdown (10Y) Largest decline over 10 years	—	-36.54%	—
Current Drawdown Current decline from peak	-3.89%	-1.80%	-2.09%
Average Drawdown Average peak-to-trough decline	-14.00%	-29.58%	+15.58%
Ulcer Index Depth and duration of drawdowns from previous peaks	8.36%	12.17%	-3.81%

Volatility

COPP vs. HG=F - Volatility Comparison

Sprott Copper Miners ETF (COPP) has a higher volatility of 15.24% compared to Copper (HG=F) at 8.62%. This indicates that COPP's price experiences larger fluctuations and is considered to be riskier than HG=F based on this measure. The chart below showcases a comparison of their rolling one-month volatility.

Volatility by Period

	COPP	HG=F	Difference
Volatility (1M) Calculated over the trailing 1-month period	15.24%	8.62%	+6.62%
Volatility (6M) Calculated over the trailing 6-month period	36.29%	21.89%	+14.40%
Volatility (1Y) Calculated over the trailing 1-year period	42.84%	35.56%	+7.28%
Volatility (5Y) Calculated over the trailing 5-year period, annualized	40.77%	26.87%	+13.90%
Volatility (10Y) Calculated over the trailing 10-year period, annualized	40.77%	23.67%	+17.10%

Frequently Asked Questions

Can I hold both COPP and HG=F in my portfolio?

COPP and HG=F have a correlation of 0.70, meaning they provide meaningful diversification benefit when combined. Depending on your allocation goals, holding both could reduce overall portfolio risk.

Which is riskier, COPP or HG=F?

COPP has higher volatility (15.24%) compared to HG=F (8.62%). In terms of maximum drawdown, COPP dropped -44.37% vs HG=F's -68.86%.

Which has better risk-adjusted returns?

COPP currently has the higher Sharpe Ratio (2.50 vs 0.83), meaning it's delivered slightly more return per unit of risk over the trailing 12 months. However, this ranking shifts over time - use the Risk/Return Score above for a more comprehensive view that combines Sharpe, Sortino, and other measures used by quantitative funds.